At last – complete clarity on Brexit

Finally, the Brexit deal is fully clarified, and we all know precisely what is going to happen.

1. The government has submitted its proposal to the EU. Only a handful of people know what’s in it, but it’s submitted, so that’s OK!

2. Nigel Faridge has admitted that the £350,000,000 on the bus was a mistake and we only actually pay less than £9Bn a year, so that’s all right then.

3. To save that £9Bn for the NHS we just have to make a down-payment of £39Bn and an extra £17+Bn per annum in additional customs documentation charges. That’s a really great deal!

4. The loss of the original savings for the NHS doesn’t matter, as the cost is about to drop dramatically, since we are running short of doctors and nurses, as they seem, for some reason, to be unwilling to work in xenophobic UK – but that really cuts down on payroll costs.

5. We won’t need the NHS anyway, because everybody will be fit and healthy from going into the fields and picking their own rotting fruit and veg because nobody else wants to do it.

These huge advantages clearly offset the government’s loss of 7% of tax revenue when all the City’s Euro exchange dealings, staff and expertise go off to Hamburg and Paris.

For me, one of the many disappointments throughout the Brexit fiasco has been the lack of impartiality from the BBC.

I never expected them to take an anti-Brexit stance, but I did expect fair and impartial coverage. I have been extremely disappointed in the BBC throughout. They regularly trot out the arch euroscpetic lot, Redwood, JRM, IDS, Bone, et al, never challenging their malicious anti EU propaganda and rarely give a pro Remain viewpoint. I watched an interview with Redwood, shortly after his advice not to invest in the UK had become news, I waited for the BBC reporter to bring it up, but no, Redwood was allowed to spout his usual nonsense, none of which was challenged and no mention was made of why he advised investors to remove their money from the UK.

This morning I read an article on the BBC news website, with the headline 'Boris Warns of Brexit Meltdown'; within a short while this headline had been changed to 'Boris Calls for 'guts' in Brexit Talks'. Obviously the first headline did not suit the pro-Brexit preferred line

For me, one of the many disappointments throughout the Brexit fiasco has been the lack of impartiality from the BBC.

I never expected them to take an anti-Brexit stance, but I did expect fair and impartial coverage. I have been extremely disappointed in the BBC throughout. They regularly trot out the arch euroscpetic lot, Redwood, JRM, IDS, Bone, et al, never challenging their malicious anti EU propaganda and rarely give a pro Remain viewpoint. I watched an interview with Redwood, shortly after his advice not to invest in the UK had become news, I waited for the BBC reporter to bring it up, but no, Redwood was allowed to spout his usual nonsense, none of which was challenged and no mention was made of why he advised investors to remove their money from the UK.

This morning I read an article on the BBC news website, with the headline 'Boris Warns of Brexit Meltdown'; within a short while this headline had been changed to 'Boris Calls for 'guts' in Brexit Talks'. Obviously the first headline did not suit the pro-Brexit preferred line

Well, yes. They'd want to draw attention to the Tory approach, wouldn't they? Both parties probably have about the same percentage of honest politicians but the Tories are better at disguising the fact.

Well, yes. They'd want to draw attention to the Tory approach, wouldn't they? Both parties probably have about the same percentage of honest politicians but the Tories are better at disguising the fact.

Cheers,

R.

Click to expand...

Thanks forthe complement Roger.
Actually the Tories and Socialists are in equal disarray. It does not matter in the case of the socialists because they are not yet in government. It does matter in the case of the Tories because notionally we are in government.

Thanks forthe complement Roger.
Actually the Tories and Socialists are in equal disarray. It does not matter in the case of the socialists because they are not yet in government. It does matter in the case of the Tories because notionally we are in government.

Click to expand...

The operative word is "notionally".

Being generous, Treece is giving the idiot brexiters enough rope to hang themselves and Labour is in turn giving the idiot Tories enough rope to hang themselves. No politician is stupid enough to take responsibility for Brexit if they can possibly pass the buck. (I initially mis-typed "muck" for "bick", but on second thoughts...)

Or, more realistically, neither party is prepared to implement representative democracy and both are in thrall to the hanging-and-flogging tendency (= brexiters) among the elderly or stupid or both.

I think you've put your finger on the sore spot. Politics has always been about the fringes or (if you prefer) the uncommitted voters.

Click to expand...

Dear Andrew,

Trouble is, these buggers ARE committed (as many of them should be). Give 'em half a chance to bring back workhouses, penal servitude, flogging, fox hunting and the death penalty -- let alone support Brexit -- and they'll vote like a shot.

And the great white hope, Trump is now making the bottom line of any future trade deal explicitly clear, we should not hold out any hope for our standards and our way of life...we will not be partners, we will have no control... what will the brexiteers have achieved?